Topic: Political Law and Public International Law – Judicial Department (Supreme Court)

XI. Judicial Department > E. The Supreme Court > 1. Composition, Powers, and Functions

I. COMPOSITION OF THE SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court of the Philippines is the highest judicial body, composed of one Chief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices. It sits en banc (as a whole) or in divisions of three, five, or seven members. The composition of the Court is determined by Section 4(1), Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution.

Qualifications for Appointment

According to Section 7, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution, to be appointed as a Justice of the Supreme Court, the candidate must:

Be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines;
Be at least 40 years old;
Have been a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law for at least 15 years;
Be of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence.

Appointments and the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC)

Justices are appointed by the President from a list of at least three nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC). This process ensures transparency and insulates the appointments from political influence.

Section 8(2), Article VIII provides that the appointments to the judiciary do not require confirmation by the Commission on Appointments (CA).

Term of Office

Justices of the Supreme Court hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of 70 or become incapacitated to discharge their duties. They may only be removed through impeachment, as provided by Section 2, Article XI of the Constitution.

II. POWERS OF THE SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court is granted judicial power under Section 1, Article VIII of the Constitution. Judicial power includes:

Settling actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable;
Determining whether there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government.

1. Original Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over certain cases, as provided by Section 5(1), Article VIII of the Constitution. These include:

Cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls;
Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.

The Court’s original jurisdiction over these matters allows it to directly receive and decide cases without the need for prior adjudication by lower courts.

2. Appellate Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction over the following types of cases:

Final judgments and orders of lower courts in all cases involving:
- The constitutionality or validity of a law, treaty, or executive issuance;
- The legality of a tax, impost, or assessment;
- The jurisdiction of lower courts;
- Criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.

The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is discretionary in certain cases (via Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, also known as a Petition for Review on Certiorari) and mandatory in others (e.g., cases where death penalty was imposed, though capital punishment has been abolished).

3. Rule-Making Power

The Supreme Court has the exclusive power to promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts. Under Section 5(5), Article VIII, the Supreme Court’s rule-making power includes:

The power to adopt new rules of evidence, procedure, and pleading;
The ability to promulgate rules concerning the admission to the practice of law;
The authority to supervise the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).

Rules promulgated by the Supreme Court must provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, and should not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights.

4. Administrative Supervision

The Supreme Court exercises administrative supervision over all lower courts and their personnel. Under Section 6, Article VIII, it has the power to:

Discipline judges of lower courts and judicial employees;
Conduct investigations into allegations of wrongdoing by judges or personnel;
Issue guidelines for the judiciary's operations and management.

5. Power of Judicial Review

Under Section 5(2)(a), Article VIII, the Supreme Court may review the constitutionality of:

Laws, treaties, and executive orders;
Acts of Congress and administrative agencies;
Presidential actions (executive orders, decrees, proclamations);
Any other government act or decision.

The power of judicial review is not automatic. A petition must present an actual case or controversy, and the petitioner must have standing to raise the issue. Additionally, the petition must meet the requisites of judicial review: (1) the existence of an actual case or controversy, (2) legal standing, (3) the issue must be ripe for adjudication, and (4) the petition must raise a constitutional question.

6. Power to Declare Laws Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court may declare a law, treaty, or executive issuance unconstitutional if it contravenes any provision of the Constitution. The declaration of unconstitutionality can only be made by a majority of the Justices sitting en banc (Section 4, Article VIII).

7. Power of Impeachment Oversight

While the House of Representatives has the power to impeach, and the Senate has the power to try impeachments, the Supreme Court has a role in ensuring that due process is observed during impeachment proceedings. It also has the authority to review the legality of impeachment actions, especially if there is a question of constitutionality involved.

III. FUNCTIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court serves several essential functions that establish its role as the final arbiter of justice in the country:

1. Final Arbiter of Legal Disputes

As the court of last resort, the Supreme Court’s decisions are final and executory. No appeal is available from a decision of the Supreme Court, except in very limited cases like motions for reconsideration or petitions for certiorari in instances of grave abuse of discretion.

2. Guardian of the Constitution

The Supreme Court ensures the protection of constitutional rights and the adherence to the principles of the Constitution. This is evident in its power of judicial review and its role in interpreting laws and executive actions in light of the Constitution.

3. Rule-Maker and Administrator

In addition to deciding cases, the Supreme Court is responsible for promulgating procedural rules for all courts, maintaining the ethical standards of the legal profession, and supervising the administration of justice throughout the country.

4. Judicial Independence

One of the crucial roles of the Supreme Court is to maintain judicial independence. This ensures that the judiciary remains free from undue influence by the legislative or executive branches. The Court has ruled on cases ensuring the financial autonomy of the judiciary, independence in appointments, and the separation of powers.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court of the Philippines plays a pivotal role in the country’s judicial system. It serves as the guardian of the Constitution, ensures judicial independence, and acts as the final arbiter in legal disputes. Its composition, powers, and functions are clearly delineated in the 1987 Constitution, and the Court is tasked with upholding the rule of law and safeguarding the rights of the people.

Topic: Political Law and Public International Law > XI. Judicial Department > E. The Supreme Court > 1. Composition, Powers, and Functions > a. Power to Promulgate Rules

The Power to Promulgate Rules (Rule-Making Power of the Supreme Court)

The power to promulgate rules is one of the key functions of the Supreme Court under the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. This power is essential for the administration of justice, the protection of rights, and ensuring a fair and efficient judicial system. Below is a detailed exposition of the Supreme Court’s power to promulgate rules under the Constitution:

I. Constitutional Basis

The authority of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules is explicitly provided under Article VIII, Section 5(5) of the 1987 Constitution, which states:

"Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

(5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts; the admission to the practice of law; the Integrated Bar; and legal assistance to the underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights."

From this constitutional provision, it is clear that the Supreme Court’s power to promulgate rules encompasses:

Protection and Enforcement of Constitutional Rights: The rules may touch on mechanisms to safeguard constitutional rights, such as due process, equal protection, and freedom of speech.
Pleading, Practice, and Procedure: These refer to the formal steps in legal actions, how cases should be filed, heard, and decided in court.
Admission to the Practice of Law: This includes rules on the admission of individuals to the bar, such as bar examinations, continuing legal education, and disciplinary proceedings.
The Integrated Bar: The Court has the power to regulate and supervise the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).
Legal Assistance to the Underprivileged: This entails rules designed to ensure access to justice for the poor, such as the establishment of free legal aid programs.

II. Nature and Scope of the Rule-Making Power

A. Exclusive and Original Power

The Supreme Court’s power to promulgate rules is exclusive and original, meaning it does not require legislative intervention or concurrence to exercise this power. The legislative branch cannot encroach upon this authority. Any attempt by Congress to legislate on matters within the Supreme Court’s rule-making domain would be unconstitutional.

B. Limitations on the Rule-Making Power

While the rule-making power is broad, it is not without limitations:

Procedural in Nature: The Supreme Court can only issue rules concerning pleading, practice, and procedure. These are rules on how cases are litigated but do not affect substantive rights, which remain under the domain of the legislature.
Non-Diminution of Substantive Rights: The rules promulgated by the Supreme Court cannot diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights as protected by law or the Constitution.
Simplicity and Expediency: The rules must provide for a simplified and inexpensive procedure aimed at the speedy disposition of cases. This reflects the constitutional principle that justice should not only be done but should be rendered swiftly and at minimal cost.
Uniformity of Rules: The rules must be uniform for all courts of the same grade, ensuring that the administration of justice does not vary unpredictably between different courts at the same level.

III. Illustrative Examples of the Rule-Making Power

Over the years, the Supreme Court has exercised its rule-making power in several key areas, including:

A. Judicial Affidavit Rule

Implemented to simplify and expedite court proceedings by allowing the submission of affidavits in place of direct examination in many cases. This reduced delays caused by lengthy trial proceedings.

B. Continuous Trial System

To address case congestion and delay in courts, the Supreme Court introduced rules mandating continuous trial, limiting postponements, and prescribing specific time periods for hearings and resolutions of cases.

C. Rule on Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE)

The Court promulgated rules requiring members of the bar to undergo continuing legal education, aimed at ensuring that lawyers remain up-to-date with the latest legal developments.

D. Bar Matter No. 850 (Mandatory Legal Aid Service)

This rule mandates that practicing lawyers must render free legal services to indigent clients, enforcing the constitutional principle of access to justice for the underprivileged.

IV. The Supreme Court’s Role in Protecting Constitutional Rights Through Rule-Making

The Supreme Court’s rule-making power is not confined merely to technical procedural issues. It also has a broader role in ensuring the protection of constitutional rights. For example:

A. Writ of Amparo and Writ of Habeas Data

These rules were promulgated to address extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, expanding judicial remedies for victims and their families.

B. Writ of Kalikasan

This special rule provides a legal remedy for individuals or groups whose constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology is violated or threatened.

V. Judicial Independence and the Rule-Making Power

The power to promulgate rules is also a reflection of judicial independence. By allowing the Supreme Court to create rules for the courts and the legal profession without interference from the executive or legislative branches, the Constitution ensures that the judiciary remains free from external pressures.

A. Checks on Congress

Congress cannot alter the rules of pleading, practice, or procedure promulgated by the Supreme Court. Although Congress has the power to legislate on substantive rights, it is constitutionally prohibited from amending or overriding procedural rules set by the Court.

B. Executive Non-Interference

The executive branch cannot impede the enforcement of these judicial rules. It has a duty to respect and implement the rules issued by the Supreme Court in the administration of justice.

VI. Amendments and Updates to the Rules

The Supreme Court regularly amends and updates its rules to respond to developments in legal practice, changing societal conditions, and evolving jurisprudence. For example:

Rules on Evidence: The Court has periodically revised the Rules of Evidence to incorporate new standards, such as those related to electronic evidence and updated hearsay rules.
E-Courts and E-Filing: In response to technological advancements and the need to modernize the judiciary, the Court has implemented rules facilitating the use of electronic courts and e-filing systems to streamline judicial processes.

VII. Impact of the Rule-Making Power

The Supreme Court’s rule-making authority has a profound impact on the legal system:

Speedier and More Efficient Judicial Processes: Rules designed to expedite procedures (e.g., Judicial Affidavit Rule) have helped reduce court congestion and delays.
Equal Access to Justice: Rules mandating free legal aid services and facilitating the filing of cases for the underprivileged ensure that justice is not confined to those who can afford legal representation.
Adaptation to Modern Needs: The Court’s power to revise and update procedural rules allows the judiciary to adapt to new challenges, such as the digitization of court processes and the increased complexity of legal disputes.

Conclusion

The power of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules is a fundamental aspect of its constitutional mandate to ensure the orderly and efficient administration of justice. Through this rule-making authority, the Court can protect constitutional rights, streamline court procedures, regulate the practice of law, and maintain the integrity of the judicial system. This power underscores the Court’s independence and its pivotal role in upholding the rule of law in the Philippines.